MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140249049 · doi:10.3928/01484834-20070101-05

The Moral Development of Baccalaureate Nursing Students: Understanding Unethical Behavior in Classroom and Clinical Settings

2007· review· en· W2140249049 on OpenAlex
Pamela Baxter, Sheryl Boblin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral developmentPsychologyQuality (philosophy)Foundation (evidence)Nurse educatorNursingMoral reasoningMedical educationSocial psychologyMedicineNurse education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unethical behavior in both classroom and clinical settings is a concern for nurse educators and has the potential to greatly influence the quality of patient care. A review of the literature suggests that students may view unethical clinical behaviors as different from unethical classroom behaviors because they recognize that clinical behaviors may have a direct effect on patient care. An overview of three moral theories, proposed by Kohlberg, Gilligan, and Rest, provides insight into the reasons for unethical behavior. These theories provide the foundation for strategies nurse educators can use to help reduce unethical behavior in both classroom and clinical settings in an attempt to ensure quality patient care.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.532
GPT teacher head0.681
Teacher spread0.150 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it